'Political Reform' thread

Javan

I understand today FF will be launching their full manifesto and FG will be launching their piece on political reform. What would Boardsies like to see as political reform proposals from the two largest parties?

Personally I'll be very disappointed if the reform proposals are limited to things like changing a few numbers here and there. The number of ministers and ministerial pay / pensions is a sideshow. If a government appoints a huge cabinet I believe that is because the party leadership of the main government party feels the need to buy the loyalty of its TDs with sinecures. The real reform would be to fix the party structures and appoint strong leaders so that such crude measures are not needed.

The number of TDs and senators is only slightly less of a sideshow. We could do with fewer TDs. Larger constituencies could work to reduce the level of parish pump politics by making it impractical for members to work a large enough proportion of the electorate to buy votes by fixing potholes.

The structure and role of the Senate is an interesting area for reform. I know I have always been much more impressed with the better senators than I have with the better TDs. I'm thinking of people like David Norris and Shane Ross particularly. I'd like to see the Senate having a stronger role in proposing changes to legislation, if that can be done without slowing the process excessively. The Senate should not become any more directly elected (it is not a Dail-lite) though I'd be interested in proposals on changing the nomination processes.

In the Dail itself the removal or loosening of the Party whip is a key reform that cannot come soon enough. I also believe the practice of pairing should be abolished immediately. These two changes would make individual members both more powerful and more directly accountable. Imagine if we as the electorate could look at each individual member's voting record and actually infer something about the type of person and politician we were considering re-electing. That could go a long way towards making sure idiots who should never have been elected are identified immediately and not given a second term.

Any other thoughts?

gandalf

Already posted these as part of this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056168779

But here is the Political reform part again separately.

Political Reform

• Abolish the Seanad.
• Reduce the number of TD's to around 100.
• The elections for the Dail to be fulfilled against a total list system.
• Maximum term in office of 3 Dails for all TD's.
• TD's only allowed to deal with national issues.
• If a TD stands down or dies his party replaces them with the next person on the list submitted before the last general election avoiding by-elections.
• TD's, Ministers & Taoiseachs pay to be brought back to more realistic levels.
• Dail Holidays reduced to 1 month in the summer, a week at Christmas and 10 working days for the rest of the year.
• Pensions only become active at retirement age and only one state pension can be held.
• Reduce the number of councils to around 5 or 6.
• Councillors to become fulltime paid positions at average wage levels.
• Any state employees that become a TD or Councillor will have to relinquish their position so it becomes available to fill with a new employee.
• Council elections to occur every two years.
• Only Councillors are allowed deal with local issues, any local issue referred by a TD will be put to the back of the queue.
• Any TD who consistently meddles in local affairs be banned from going forward for re-election.
• All political positions subject to a vouched expense scheme with full receipts required.

bamboozle

gandalf wrote: »

Already posted these as part of this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056168779

But here is the Political reform part again separately.


Political Reform

• Abolish the Seanad.
• Reduce the number of TD's to around 100.
• The elections for the Dail to be fulfilled against a total list system.
• Maximum term in office of 3 Dails for all TD's.
• TD's only allowed to deal with national issues.
• If a TD stands down or dies his party replaces them with the next person on the list submitted before the last general election avoiding by-elections.
• TD's, Ministers & Taoiseachs pay to be brought back to more realistic levels.
• Dail Holidays reduced to 1 month in the summer, a week at Christmas and 10 working days for the rest of the year.
• Pensions only become active at retirement age and only one state pension can be held.
• Reduce the number of councils to around 5 or 6.
• Councillors to become fulltime paid positions at average wage levels.
• Any state employees that become a TD or Councillor will have to relinquish their position so it becomes available to fill with a new employee.
• Council elections to occur every two years.
• Only Councillors are allowed deal with local issues, any local issue referred by a TD will be put to the back of the queue.
• Any TD who consistently meddles in local affairs be banned from going forward for re-election.
• All political positions subject to a vouched expense scheme with full receipts required.

sounds excellent to me, FG announced last week details of their plan to cut govt spending on ministerial cars, drivers and govt jets. Hardly rocket science to reduce the number of cars and have a car pool and have only gardai driving taoiseach, min for defence and president, other drivers to be civilians which means a few more gardai 'on the beat' where they should be rather than winding down their careers until pension kicks in.

Fair play to FG for stating these measures, FF in power since '97 have done nothing but increase pay, pensions, introduce ridiculous payments for td's chairing dail committees so whatever bluff they come out with today i wont believe.

Sulmac

Well, we all know the jist of Fine Gael's policy on political reform - abolish the Seanad, reduce the numbers of TDs by around 20, restoring the Freedom of Information Act to what it originally was, some local government reform, Dáil reform (including major reforms of committees, a new budgetary process and more sitting days, etc.), whistleblowers protection and so on. Their "New Politics" document can be found here. I can't see there being much added to the current proposals.

Labour have similar proposals, including abolishing the Seanad, an independent Electoral Commission, 50% increase in Dáil sitting days, whistleblowers protection and spending limits for local and Presidential elections. Their 'New Government, Better Government' document can be found here.

Fianna Fáil's plans for political reform will be included in their manifesto which is launched today. The Irish Times mentions some of what will be in it:

Fianna Fáil proposes radical changes in government

STEPHEN COLLINS and MARY MINIHAN

Mon, Feb 07, 2011

THE GENERAL election campaign will step up a gear this week with the major parties unveiling their manifestos. Fianna Fáil will propose a radical change in the way government works, with ministers no longer having to serve as constituency TDs.

In its manifesto to be published today, Fianna Fáil will suggest ministers should not be hampered by having to do constituency work. TDs who are chosen by the taoiseach to be members of the cabinet will be replaced by a substitute in the Dáil who would have to be named on a list published before the election.

Ministers would continue to attend the Dáil, answer questions and participate in debates, but they would not have votes in Dáil divisions. “This system would allow them to devote significantly more time to their ministerial duties,” according to the manifesto. Ministers would continue to require Dáil approval for their appointment.

Another radical change is that the Taoiseach would be allowed to nominate people who are not members of the Oireachtas to be ministers. A confirmation process would be put in place which would include “a presentation of priorities” before a committee.

Fianna Fáil will propose a revamped electoral system which would see a mix of single-seat constituencies elected through single transferable votes along with a top-up national list.

The party would back the introduction of measures to favour gender balance. Representatives would be elected from the list “to balance under-representation which would emerge in the constituencies”.

Fianna Fáil would support the extension of the franchise for presidential elections to all Irish citizens, including emigrants. The party has suggested allowing candidates for the office to be nominated by petition of registered electors. The election of the ceann comhairle by secret ballot is also proposed. This election is the first item on the agenda of every incoming Dáil.

Another reform is that all legislation should be submitted for independent fiscal analysis in advance of Dáil debates, and a “regulatory oversight committee” would have expert staff available to it to assist in an ongoing review of functions.

Dáil sitting hours should be changed to those of a normal working week for most of the year. Fianna Fáil would back a constitutional amendment to extend polling in elections over two days to facilitate higher voter participation.

Rest of article.

...interesting that they've waited for fourteen years for such 'radical' reform. The idea that Ministers would be separate from the Dáil is a good one, but they are going the wrong way about it, creating 15 more people who would seek re-election and giving the ruling party/parties an advantage! It would only make sense with a complete list system, or by requiring that only TDs elected by a list can become Ministers. They have some good ideas, but I'd be very sceptical about how dedicated they would be to implementing any of them.

I can't see how you can 'get rid' of a party whip. It comes naturally with having political parties. Realistically the only way you can 'get rid' of it is by electing only independents - who we can see are typically more than willing to abuse the parish pump and create instability. Pairing can be abolished immediately as it is something the parties have agreed between themselves casually. I doubt they'd be willing to do so, as it benefits both sides.

Javan

So we disagree on some of the fundamentals here. Why abolish the Senate, if you don't mind me asking? It seems to me that the upper house can serve a very useful function in making sure the Dail and the ruling Party is not all-powerful, and in adding some additional professional and considered opinions to legislation.

You have no mention of the party whip, while I think that is absolutely key. Individual backbenchers are not properly accountable to the electorate at the moment. When they go for re-election we have so little hard data to go on about their performance in the Dail.

Aside from the value of a voting record, loosening the whip will allow individual members to stand up and be counted (literally) on issues that are important to them even if their view is contrary to the party line. That means the backbenchers you directly elect will be both more effective / powerful and more directly accountable to you. Is that not a good thing?

the_syco

Javan wrote: »

Imagine if we as the electorate could look at each individual member's voting record and actually infer something about the type of person and politician we were considering re-electing. That could go a long way towards making sure idiots who should never have been elected are identified immediately and not given a second term.

Sadly, unless a rule is made by "the nanny state" stopping us from re-electing them, "I'll vote ole Billy who fixed mauh water pump"... As bad as it is, a lot of the bad ones get elected for doing their job, albeit locally, pumping flesh, and putting their names on any small jobs they never heard of until they were completed. I'm no longer surprised at how much "work" that a local politician get their name attached to, which would be done regardless by the civil servants.

Pete_Cavan

I agree with all Gandalf has said.

People on here before have called for TDs salaries to be benchmarked against the minimum wage. I dont think this is a good idea because in this case there would be a tendency for TDs to increase the minimum wage in order to increase their own salary. We need to become a lower cost economy and wages (and cost of living) should be kept as low as possible. I think TDs salaries should be benchmarked against national average disposable income. This way there is an incentive for TDs to improve the lives of the people. It also acts as a deterrent to just lumping more taxes onto people when the government needs money because more taxes would mean less disposable income which would mean TDs salaries go down.

I also would like to see our 34 local authorities abolished and replaced with 8 regional councils (county Dublin plus 7 councils with populations of ~500,000). This would save a fortune in eliminating duplication and providing economies of scale.

Javan wrote: »

You have no mention of the party whip, while I think that is absolutely key. Individual backbenchers are not properly accountable to the electorate at the moment. When they go for re-election we have so little hard data to go on about their performance in the Dail.

Correct me if Im wrong here, but isnt the party whip system imposed by the parties themselves, rather than our political system? Either way backbenchers are free to leave the party if they feel gagged by the party whip. The party whip is just an excuse for useless TDs, they can get away from it if they had any balls and they truly believed in something.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

nesf

Am somewhat surprised by how much I like FF's electoral reform proposals...

nesf

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yeah I agree to be honest. While yes it would get rid of some of the gombeens such a limit would force out some excellent politicians long before they stopped being able to contribute to the Dáil. Micheal D springs to mind (though I utterly disagree with him), Micheal Noonan another etc et al.

gandalf

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The flipside of this and advantage is that a limit would ensure fresh ideas and candidates on a regular basis and coupled with a list system the incentive would be to make hard decisions and actually make a difference. Part of the problem here is we have too many "seat blockers" in the Dail making no real contribution other than deal with parish pump politics.

Politics should not be seen as a career it should be viewed as a public service and a limit on the amount of time that can be spent in the dail will help address this.

nesf

gandalf wrote: »

The flipside of this and advantage is that a limit would ensure fresh ideas and candidates on a regular basis and coupled with a list system the incentive would be to make hard decisions and actually make a difference. Part of the problem here is we have too many "seat blockers" in the Dail making no real contribution other than deal with parish pump politics.

Politics should not be seen as a career it should be viewed as a public service and a limit on the amount of time that can be spent in the dail will help address this.

All you'll get is the people who elected the old seat blocker electing a new seat blocker who'll just have a different face and that'll be about it. The problem lies with the electorate voting for muppets not anything else.

the_syco

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I think TDs salaries should be benchmarked against national average disposable income. This way there is an incentive for TDs to improve the lives of the people. It also acts as a deterrent to just lumping more taxes onto people when the government needs money because more taxes would mean less disposable income which would mean TDs salaries go down.

Yeah... loving that theory, but when has benchmarking ever meant reduction of wages in Ireland?

gandalf wrote: »

Part of the problem here is we have too many "seat blockers" in the Dail making no real contribution other than deal with parish pump politics.

Here's a completely mad idea: after two sittings of the Dail, they have to f**k off for a forced break, until the next election (and not the next by-election). It'll ensure fresh faces come in, but at the same time ensure we don't lose any... knowledgeable (the word I want to use escapes me so early on a Monday morn) people.

mark17

There must be some sort of system put in place where-by when a T.D. either dies or resigns their seat, a maximum time limit be in place for a by-election. It was a complete mockery of democracy to see the Courts ruling on this issue. Here in Waterford everybody knew Minister Cullen was resigning as far back as 2009, so if I knew so did the Taoiseach. We were denied our right to democratic representation, and again the issue was before the High Court. The courts are not there to force a government to allow people their democratic rights. This must be sorted firstly as part of any political reform in relation to ministerial cars or pay or Seanad reforms.

gandalf

nesf wrote: »

All you'll get is the people who elected the old seat blocker electing a new seat blocker who'll just have a different face and that'll be about it. The problem lies with the electorate voting for muppets not anything else.

I agree that a major part of the problem is people voting someone into the National Parliament for the wrong reasons (ie local affairs).

The list system would address this because it removes voting for personalities and means people will have to vote for the parties and their policies. It will kill the "I never vote for X party but Y (who is a member of the X party) is a nice guy and works hard locally so he gets my vote" kind of mentality.

the_syco wrote: »

Here's a completely mad idea: after two sittings of the Dail, they have to f**k off for a forced break, until the next election (and not the next by-election). It'll ensure fresh faces come in, but at the same time ensure we don't lose any... knowledgeable (the word I want to use escapes me so early on a Monday morn) people.

So something like an enforced career break of one term. I like it that would be an acceptable compromise.

nesf

gandalf wrote: »

I agree that a major part of the problem is people voting someone into the National Parliament for the wrong reasons (ie local affairs).

The list system would address this because it removes voting for personalities and means people will have to vote for the parties and their policies. It will kill the "I never vote for X party but Y (who is a member of the X party) is a nice guy and works hard locally so he gets my vote" kind of mentality.

I'd agree that a list system is a far better solution to this problem.

PomBear

Javan wrote: »

I understand today FF will be launching their full manifesto and FG will be launching their piece on political reform. What would Boardsies like to see as political reform proposals from the two largest parties?

lolz, Fianna Fáil are no longer one of the largest parties. Far from it, Fourth largest if they're lucky.

Sulmac

I've outlined my proposals for political reform, and since I'm too lazy to write them out again, I'll just quote this post I made a few weeks ago:

As I've said many times on here before, I'm all for abolishing the Seanad - as long as there are substantial reforms made to the Dáil to give it real powers to legislate and scrutinise the government of the day.

Ireland is unique in Europe as it is the only small (in terms of area and population), unitary (as opposed to federal, like Switzerland or Austria) state with a second chamber. Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Portugal and, further afield, New Zealand all have unicameral parliaments and still manage to function - I would argue that they do a better job with one chamber than we do with two.

Should we abolish the Seanad (and let's face it, a referendum is inevitable and now seems to have all-party support), we need to fundamentally reform the rest of the political system at national and local level.

First of all, reform of the Dáil committees. Dáil committees need to have some teeth (even if we don't abolish the Seanad). They also need to be free from government interference. One way that this can be done is by giving committee chairs to parties based on the D'Hondt system (based on the numbers they have in the Dáil) and random allocation of seats (although possibly allow for those with specialist skills to sit in the appropriate committee, e.g. a solicitor or barrister in Justice). Committees should have the power to determine their own agenda, enact legislation, review government legislation, and compel witnesses to attend enquiries and demand documents from any government body or department.

Secondly, a proper separation of powers needs to be introduced. No member of the cabinet should sit in the Dáil, but still be directly accountable to it. This happens in Norway and the Netherlands, where, if a member of Parliament is 'promoted' to cabinet they automatically sacrifice their seat (and are replaced by the next person in that party's list, but that's electoral reform). This has three main effects - first, the cabinet should (in theory anyway) have a more national focus as they are not tied to a constituency; second, it allows the government to bring in specialist outsiders with real skills in a given area (like the U.S. cabinet); and third, it reduces the ability of the government to dominate the Dáil. It is important that any member of the cabinet should be directly accountable to the Dáil, whether it be the chamber as a whole or the relevant committee - so 'question time' should definitely remain.

Next is reform of the electoral system. The number of TDs needs to be reduced, even if we don't change the system from PR-STV. I would suggest 100 TDs, as this is a nice round number. Next, we need some aspect of a list to bring in TDs with a national focus, whether it is a minority, half or a majority of TDs elected this way. My own preference would be for a national list system for electing all TDs (like in the Netherlands), whereby if a party gets 1% of the vote, they get one seat. However, I feel that this is unlikely due to people wanting 'our rep up in Dublin'. The most likely system would be some form of MMP (like in Germany or New Zealand, which combines FPTP with a list), although I would go further and have half of TDs elected by STV (in much larger constituencies) and the other half by a list to ensure proportionality. At the very least, if the system is not changed, we need much bigger constituencies - STV is most effective (in terms of proportionality) with more seats; every constituency should have at least 5 seats (not 3, which in rural areas means that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael usually dominate).

Following on from this, local government, as it stands, needs to be completely scrapped and replaced. We need a local government system that has real powers, crucially the power to raise its own revenue and not be dependent on central government for hand outs. A two-tier system of regions and municipalities (like most other European countries) would be best. The regions would be based around the cities/largest towns (like the current regions), while below them the municipalities would be based around towns (or in some areas, groups of islands or other geographic features) within the regions, similar to the District Councils in Northern Ireland. The regions and municipalities would be given their own responsibilities (e.g. regional roads, public transport, hospitals, tourism, water supply, etc. in the regions; local roads, primary and secondary education, libraries, swimming pools, primary health care, parks, etc. in the municipalities). Some areas (such as tertiary education) would be shared with national government but most of its focus would be on issues of national importance - justice, natural resources, international relations, the economy, etc. Local government would be able to raise their own revenue through tax, including property taxes and by taking a share of income tax and VAT raised in their area (or even, as in the Nordic countries, by being able to raise income tax within limits). Both regions and municipalities would have directly elected 'assemblies' as well as 'mayors' with real powers. The main effect of this is allowing national politicians to care about national issues. Got a pothole in your road? Go to the municipality. Problems with your social welfare application? Go to the regional government.

So, in short, I support the abolition of the Seanad - if we abolish most of the rest our political system and start again.

I note that Fianna Fáil seem to have adopted a version of my second point (separation of powers), although the way they're doing it seems to keep Ministers as TDs but not really.

I'd also support having fixed-term elections over two days (preferably a weekend), a four-year Dáil term, the new budgetary process as proposed by Fine Gael, and other aspects to make politicians more accountable (such as restoring the Freedom of Information Act to what it was). One major change needs to be voter registration; it needs to be simplified and based on PPS Numbers, like in other European countries. I'd like to see a "National Registry" like in Denmark (and other European countries) which streamlines the general process and can also be used by the public service (as well as private services like banks - although here banks are now part of the public service since we own them I guess!).

Javan

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I also would like to see our 34 local authorities abolished and replaced with 8 regional councils (county Dublin plus 7 councils with populations of ~500,000). This would save a fortune in eliminating duplication and providing economies of scale.

I must admit I have not put much thought into local government reform. Off the top of my head I'd be concerned about a local government system based on population centers. Local government needs to cater for the rural population also.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Correct me if Im wrong here, but isnt the party whip system imposed by the parties themselves, rather than our political system? Either way backbenchers are free to leave the party if they feel gagged by the party whip. The party whip is just an excuse for useless TDs, they can get away from it if they had any balls and they truly believed in something.

Yes, the party whip system is imposed by the parties, but that should not exclude it from a discussion on political reform. The parties with their rules and structures are a significant part of the overall political system.

Javan

PomBear wrote: »

lolz, Fianna Fáil are no longer one of the largest parties. Far from it, Fourth largest if they're lucky.

While it is likely that FF will lose a lot of seats in this election they will still have one of the largest national organizations with the most members. Even if they end up with no seats in the next Dail they will remain a large political party.

Javan

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'm definitely with PermaBear on this one. Term limits, or even an enforced career break, will severely limit the number of good, experienced politicians we have. I think the goal should be to quickly identify the underperforming ones and get them out after the first term, but encourage the good people to build a lasting career in politics.

bmaxi

gandalf wrote: »

Already posted these as part of this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056168779

But here is the Political reform part again separately.

Political Reform

.
• If a TD stands down or dies his party replaces them with the next person on the list submitted before the last general election avoiding by-elections.
  [*.

If this had been the case in the last Dáil we'd still have Biffo & Co.

Sulmac

Good summary of the policies proposed by the three main parties today:

Parties unveil plans for overhauling political system

07/02/11, 12:53 pm

IRELAND’S THREE biggest parties have spent the morning outlining their plans for political reform, as the second week of election campaigning got underway.

Cutting political expenditure formed the main plank of Fine Gael’s plans, with retiring members of cabinet having their severance pay abolished, while ministers would also be denied pensions until they reach the national retirement age.

Unveiling its New Politics programme for political reform in Kilkenny this morning, the party said it would insist that all TDs’ expenses are vouched, and cut the salary of the Taoiseach to €200,000 a year – with the wages of other ministers falling on a similar basis.

It also pledged to allow emigrants vote in presidential elections, with the franchise being extended to the general election and other ballots if it proves practical.

A comprehensive Dáil reform, meanwhile, will see backbench TDs given power to introduce their own Bills, committees being given full powers of investigation, and introducing legislation in a new ‘bare-bones’ framework to allow committees deal with them on a non-partisan basis.

‘Weighted majorities’, where a simple majority of TDs would not be enough to pass certain measures, would also be considered.

Among the party’s other promises were the earlier declared intentions to abolish the Seanad and reduce the number of TDs by 20, to 146.

Fianna Fáil, meanwhile, has outlined plans to enable governments to appoint ministers from outside of the Oireachtas, with TDs – where they become ministers – giving up their seats and being substituted in the Dáil.

Launching its manifesto in Dublin, Fianna Fáil said that whether elected as TDs or Senators or appointed from outside, ministers would be entitled to participate in debates in the Dáil but would not be allowed to vote in divisions.

Fianna Fáil also propose a Citizens’ Assembly which would develop reform proposals before any referenda are brought.

Both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael propose to ban corporate donations to parties, and to lower the maximum amount that an individual can donate to a party.

Labour, meanwhile, said it would establish a Constitutional Convention of experts to draw up an entirely new Constitution.

It also proposes the abolition of the Seanad, and says the Dáil would sit for more days and longer hours if it was in power. It also seeks to devolve more decision-making powers to local communities.

Labour also wants to impose new spending limits for all elections, and put limits on party spending for the six-month period in advance of elections.
Appointments to public bodies, meanwhile, would require ratification by the Dáil, while the party also wants to repeal amendments to the Freedom of Information Acts which it says have neutered the law.

From TheJournal.ie.

mike65

Full disclosure!

When a policy is published all the parties to the forming of that policy and their input should be published as an addendum to the policy document. The TDs take the blame/praise but have had only modest part in the examination of an issue that needs addressing and the subsequent proposed solutions.

Our civil servants have been flying below the radar far too long.

Javan

Sulmac wrote: »

I've outlined my proposals for political reform, and since I'm too lazy to write them out again, I'll just quote this post I made a few weeks ago

Nice one Sulmac.

I have always supported the Senate as being the professional oversight of the legislative process. If it can be reformed to be effective I think that is an important and valuable function that should not be dismissed.
A professional cabinet would also do the job.

The problem I have with a list system is that the list is chosen by the party, so there is no opportunity for the electorate to vote someone out. There is also the question of how to treat independents. Do independents (candidates not affiliated to a party) have any place in a list system? I want to have the option of voting for a person I particularly trust or respect regardless of party affiliation.

If we are to have a professional cabinet then I'd say go all the way with it: No TD is ever elected as a minister (or if they are to serve as a minister they must immediately stand down, forcing a by-election under the current system). The ministers selected should be ratified by the Oireachtas (both houses, if the Senate is not disbanded). They should be paid at the senior civil servant grades. I'd even suggest they should be forbidden from running for public office for a period of at least a year after they step down as ministers.

Sulmac

Javan wrote: »

The problem I have with a list system is that the list is chosen by the party, so there is no opportunity for the electorate to vote someone out. There is also the question of how to treat independents. Do independents (candidates not affiliated to a party) have any place in a list system? I want to have the option of voting for a person I particularly trust or respect regardless of party affiliation.

I agree with you on this.

There is the theory that if you don't like "candidate X", don't vote for their party.

Other countries have developed other solutions. Finland uses an 'open list' system whereby you select which candidate from a certain party you'd prefer to see elected, ahead of the rest of those in that party's list. Another option would be to have party 'primaries' to allow grassroots members/the general public to have a say on the order of the list.

Independents can run on a list, although they would be taking part in a 'national' election, and not part of a local constituency. A classic example would be the Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn running his own list (Lijst Pim Fortuyn) for the 2002 election there, although he had to formally register as a party to do so.

The system of mixed-member proportional (MMP) whereby half of those elected come from a national list, and half from a constituency vote (be it first past the post or the single transferable vote) means you can vote for a party as well as an individual (and their party).

Sir Oxman

Sulmac wrote: »

I've outlined my proposals for political reform, and since I'm too lazy to write them out again, I'll just quote this post I made a few weeks ago:



I note that Fianna Fáil seem to have adopted a version of my second point (separation of powers), although the way they're doing it seems to keep Ministers as TDs but not really.

I'd also support having fixed-term elections over two days (preferably a weekend), a four-year Dáil term, the new budgetary process as proposed by Fine Gael, and other aspects to make politicians more accountable (such as restoring the Freedom of Information Act to what it was). One major change needs to be voter registration; it needs to be simplified and based on PPS Numbers, like in other European countries. I'd like to see a "National Registry" like in Denmark (and other European countries) which streamlines the general process and can also be used by the public service (as well as private services like banks - although here banks are now part of the public service since we own them I guess!).

Excellent ideas there (in your quoted post as well as this)
One thing, how can outside specialist be brought into cabinet if they have to be elected to begin with? TD-->>promoted as Minister-->>resigns seat

Does the country need two levels of local govt at all? Why not just regional councils? It's not exactly Canada we're dealing with here in terms of size.
Agree with revenue raising powers for local govt, fulltime reps on proper salary and would include a complete ban on national reps being involved at anytime with local issues.
How this would impact on re-election of sitting td's I don't know - a list system could take care of that (I mean a regional rep going forward as national rep would have better kudos maybe with the electorate for their local groundwork but then this is all based on the public recognising the difference between local and national)

I am still undecided about fixed terms for td's or td 'holidays'

The abolition of the Senate, as you say must be accompanied by radical root and branch reform of the Dail and it's committees - abolishing it without tearing apart the Dail and it's structures is futile and just a gimmick.
Definitely reduce TDs to around 100, I'm not up to date on the various voting systems but intend to look at them.

I'd go with Shane Ross's quango appointment suggestion - take away automatic gifting of board seats from Ministers and have full public interview sessions in order to ascertain candidates suitability

FOI is very important as is the abolition of unvouched expenses which is still on the go. I'm not in favour of radically reducing TDs salary. Pensions obviously, should be limited to one and no parachute payments or sympathy money. Keep age of pension eligibility the same as any other citizen of this country.

Oh and tendering out of any business that teh Oireachtas needs to fulfil it's duties and charged to the public purse - as thestory.ie shows, TDs employing tehir family and party members as their office clerks/website designers/car drivers etc should end immediately.

Sulmac

gambiaman wrote: »

Excellent ideas there (in your quoted post as well as this)
One thing, how can outside specialist be brought into cabinet if they have to be elected to begin with? TD-->>promoted as Minister-->>resigns seat

I should have been clearer. What I meant is they should be able to appoint 'non-political' people that haven't been elected to anything. This happens in the United States, and closer to home in countries like France (Christine Lagarde probably being one of the best examples). The nominee would be vetted by the appropriate committee and voted on both in committee and in the Dáil as a whole.

Should they appoint anyone who has been elected, that person should go through the same process and then automatically resign their seat on being approved.

Does the country need two levels of local govt at all? Why not just regional councils? It's not exactly Canada we're dealing with here in terms of size.

Most countries have two levels (some have three or four): regional and local. If you had one or the other, you'd run into a problem. For instance, if we had around a hundred 'municipalities' (or whatever you want to call them) around sizeable towns, there would be little co-operation and large duplication of services between them. On the other hand, if we had a a few (between five and ten, say) regions, you risk having them too large and depriving certain areas of services. The key idea is that you have balance and co-operation of services, and that local decisions are made at a local level, while more important regional decisions are made at a regional level.

I would give each level of administration its own individual responsibilities, so as to avoid duplication and waste.

the_syco

gandalf wrote: »

So something like an enforced career break of one term. I like it that would be an acceptable compromise.

Yes, but it has to be named in such a way to avoid the word "break", as otherwise they may claim it as a "holiday break"...

Also, if TD's can't do anything with local issues, it's less likely they'll be voted in again, until they do something local.

20Cent

Its pretty clear that the system does need an overhaul. The way politics is conducted in Ireland also led to the crisis we are in as well as the parties involved of course.
All the parties are getting on this band waggon with their manifesto's for change. FF doing this is particularly laughable. MM was happy enough with the system for the last 13 or 14 years. Three weeks before an election he's all over it!

One thing is clear that major reform should come from the country not just a political party because they are vested interests. Interesting what they are doing in Iceland now a National Convention on the constitution followed by a referendum. Think we should do something like that.

Einhard

gandalf wrote: »

Already posted these as part of this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056168779

But here is the Political reform part again separately.


Political Reform

• Abolish the Seanad.
• Reduce the number of TD's to around 100.
• The elections for the Dail to be fulfilled against a total list system.
• Maximum term in office of 3 Dails for all TD's.
• TD's only allowed to deal with national issues.
• If a TD stands down or dies his party replaces them with the next person on the list submitted before the last general election avoiding by-elections.
• TD's, Ministers & Taoiseachs pay to be brought back to more realistic levels.
• Dail Holidays reduced to 1 month in the summer, a week at Christmas and 10 working days for the rest of the year.
• Pensions only become active at retirement age and only one state pension can be held.
• Reduce the number of councils to around 5 or 6.
• Councillors to become fulltime paid positions at average wage levels.
• Any state employees that become a TD or Councillor will have to relinquish their position so it becomes available to fill with a new employee.
• Council elections to occur every two years.
• Only Councillors are allowed deal with local issues, any local issue referred by a TD will be put to the back of the queue.
• Any TD who consistently meddles in local affairs be banned from going forward for re-election.
• All political positions subject to a vouched expense scheme with full receipts required.

Some good points there, but I'd have an issue with limiting TDs to just three Dail terms. Some of the best performers on the Opposition benches have been TDS for far longer than that. Were that regulation in place now, FG would be without Richard Bruton and Michael Noonan, and Labour without Rabbitte, Howlin and Quinn in the next government. Serving for a prolonged periods can be a good thing if it builds experience and competence. Also, isn't it somewhat anti-democratic to deny people the right to vote from whom they choose?

Further, were such a policy in place during the 80s when, if I remember correctly, there was 3 elections in two years at one point, then a whole generation of aspiring politicians would have been wiped out in 24 months. I can;t see how such a scenario would have benefitted society. Also, seems unfair in the extreme to ask someone to fully relinquish their old jobs, when they could be voted out so soon after beginning work as a TD.